I state this with great sorrow that
Qadiani scholars failing in finding any legitimate excuse
for their open violation of the clearly stated beliefs of
the Founder of Ahmadiyya Movement
[Hazrat Mirza
Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian]
and in order to hide their feelings of shame on this account
take refuge under spreading misunderstandings about me. I
like to state this in clear terms that if any of my or any
other Ahmadi's writings are against the beliefs of the
Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement then such writings are not
admissible. Simultaneously, I will like to make it clearly
understood that still this day I have never imagined even
for a moment, that the Founder of the Movement ever claimed
Prophethood in the real sense of the word by denying which
any Muslim will go out of the Pale of Islam. But I had never
denied that following the example of the Founder I have at
times used the word 'Nabi' (Prophet) in my writings in its
metaphoric, simile, or literal sense meaning thereby a
person who predicts or makes prophecies. Such a use of the
word 'Nabi' is neither inclusive with the Founder nor with
me as it is commonly found in the writings of Auliya-Allah
[Saints of
Allah], an example whereof
is this verse of the Maulana-e-Room:

But what is more regrettable is the
fact that, in spite of my repeated clarifications to this
effect, the Qadiani Scholars do not make even a hint of my
clarifications in their writings. I, therefore, draw the
attention of all seekers-after-truth (and I have not lost
hopes that there may still be some such persons amongst the
Qadianis too) to the following three facts:

Firstly, had I ever attributed the
same meanings to the word 'Nabi' in my writings which the
Qadiani's do, then most evidently, like Qadiani's, I too, in
any of my writings, would have called those who do not
believe in the Founder of the Movement, a Kafir. Not once
but at scores of times I have challenged these gentlemen to
point out or quote even one reference from my voluminous
writings wherein I may have called a non-Ahmadi a Kafir.
Till this day, they have not been able to point out any such
quotation and Allah willing, they shall not be able to find
one till dooms day. This should have sufficed but I went to
the extent of adding this to it, and this too I have done
repeatedly, that in the same 'Review of Religions', from
which they quote for the use of word 'Nabi' by me, an
explanation of the word 'Nabi' has been given by me. Why do
not they quote the same? It is beyond honesty in a debate
that certain references may be quoted and others suppressed.
And when I offered these in support of my case, even then
they indulge in repeating the allegations without making
even any mention of my reply. I have repeatedly drawn
attention to the fact that if I have used the word 'Nabi'
(Prophet) then I have explained the sense or meanings in
which I have used the word 'Nabi'. The 'Review of Religions'
which is quoted for showing the use of the word 'Nabi' in my
writings, in the earlier volumes of the same 'Review of
Religions' but much later than the Qadiani presumed
abrogatory date of 1901, the following words will be
found:

"If the doors of Prophethood
had not been closed, then a Muhaddath has elements and
potentials of becoming a Prophet and with reference to
these elements and potentiality application of word
Prophet on a Muhaddath is permissible, i.e., we can say
that 'A Muhaddath is a Prophet'. (Review of Religions,
Vol. 3, 1904, p. 117)

"It is this ummah
[the Muslim
nation] alone in which
people though not prophets, are favoured with the speech
of Allah like Prophets and though not Messengers (Rasul)
but signs of Allah appear to them like Messengers".
(Review of Religions, Vol. 3, p. 131)

Don't the above two quotations make it
abundantly clear that I am using the word 'Nabi' (Prophet)
in its literal dictionary meanings and not in its
terminological shariah [religious
law] sense; and I consider
the doors of Prophethood closed; and don't believe in the
appearance of Prophets and messengers in this Ummah, but
believe in the appearance of people like or similar to them
-- in accordance with the Hadith, "Ulema of any Ummah are
like the prophets of Israel."

The above are the quotations from my
writings in 1904. Again in 1914, when I observed some doubts
being created, I wrote a note on an article published in
Review under the title "Ahmad is a Prophet" (I was not the
author of this article), and my note on this article read as
under:

"The word Prophet (Nabi) has
not been used in its Shariah terminological meanings
because in that sense Holy Prophet Muhammad, peace be on
him, is the Last of the Prophets. Rather the word Prophet
in this article has been used in its wider meanings
indicating one who makes prophecies after receiving news
from Allah and it is that favour which is promised by
Allah to all righteous Muslims in the Holy Quran in the
verse: "LAHUM-UL-BUSHRAA FIL HAYAT AD DUNYA"

"And for them are glad tidings in
this life; and it was this favour which was granted to
Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani in
abundance."

Secondly, these meanings were not
coined by me. Those days Qadiani schools used to make
everyone believe that they are not using the word 'Nabi' in
its Shariah terminological meanings, but only in its literal
sense, meaning thereby a person who makes prophecies; that
they believe that Prophethood terminated with the Holy
Prophet (Muhammad), peace be on him, and they don't believe
in the coming of any prophet after him, whether new or old.
I don't want to burden this pamphlet with many quotations,
and quote from the writings of two stalwarts of Qadian. Let
us first take Maulvi Sarwar Shah Sahib who is not only a
teacher of the Khalifa of Qadiani (Mian Mahmud Ahmad), but
is also an author of the commentary on the Holy Quran. He
wrote:

"The word 'Nabi', depending
on its roots, carries two meanings. Firstly, one who
receives news about the unseen from his Allah. Secondly,
a spiritually elevated person, whom Allah favours with
lots of divine speech and informs him in news of the
unknown or future. He is a Nabi and in this sense I
consider all Mujaddideen of the past as Nabis of various
degrees." (Badar, February 16, 1911)

Now I quote the stalwart, Mufti
Muhammad Sadiq Sahib. He wrote:

"(Maulana) Sahib inquired as
to whether we believe that Hazrat Mirza Sahib is a Nabi
(Prophet). I submitted that in this matter we have the
same belief as all other Muslims, that the Holy Prophet
Muhammad (peace be on him) is the Last of the prophets;
there will be no prophet after him, whether old or new;
however, the process of divine speech revelation
continues. Through complete subjugation and submission to
the Holy Prophet righteous persons in this Ummah in the
past have been receiving the gift of divine speech or
Ilham and such people will continue to receive
this gift in future too. Since Hazrat Mirza Sahib was a
recipient of Ilham and through the process of
Ilham Allah had informed him upon many events of
the future about which his prophecies came true,
therefore, Mirza Sahib was one who made prophecies and in
Arabic lexicon this is called a 'Nabi'. (Badar, Vol. 9,
No. 51-52)

Both these stalwarts are still alive.
Why does not someone ask them as to whether they were
practising deception on people by stating their beliefs to
Muslims in this manner?

Leaving aside others, let us now take
the example of the Khalifa himself as to what he used to
state at that time:

"Thirteen hundred years have
passed and none has met success by claiming
prophethood.... After his advent why has this process
been closed? What can be a greater sign than this that
whosoever became claimant of Prophethood did not succeed.
Thus it was an indication to the fact "That Allah has the
knowledge of all matters," i.e., we made him the Last of
the Prophets (or the seal of the Prophets); now there
will be no Prophet after him and now there will be no
false claimant to prophethood that we will not cause his
death. Hence it is a historic prophecy which can not be
rejected. If it is possible, then present it to us."
(Tush-heez-ul-Azhan, April, 1910)

Similarly on March 14, 1911, an
article of the present Khalifa-e-Qadian (Mian Mahmud Ahmad)
was published in 'Al-Hakam' wherein the following words
appear:

"Allah brought all types of
Prophethoods to an end by establishing the Holy Prophet
(Muhammad), peace be on him, in the state of the Last of
the Prophets (Khatum-an-Nabiyeen)".

Now it is a food for thought that
coming to end of all types of Prophethood is admitted; it is
also admitted that after the Holy Prophet, peace be on him,
there has been no claimant to prophethood except those false
claimants who were put to death and now it is proclaimed
that the Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement was a claimant to
prophethood. The previous belief of the Qadiani Khalifa
Sahib and Qadiani Ulema [clerics]
was that they used to state that the word Nabi, has been
used as a metaphor and simile carrying its literal lexicon
meanings; and they used to deny its application in its
Shariah terminological meanings; and they believed that all
types of Prophethood has come to an end with the Holy
Prophet, peace be on him; and they did not believe in the
appearing or coming of any prophet, whether new or old (and
now they say that the Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement was
a prophet).

Thirdly, above all let us examine as
to what was the belief of the Founder of the Ahmadiyya
Movement about himself. There is no doubt that he used the
word 'Nabi' in certain meanings and that in fact was the
basis of Fatwa-e-Kufar [pronouncement
that a certain person is a kafir or
unbeliever] against him in
1891. It is worth considering that when the claim to
Prophethood was attributed to him, what was his reply to
that?

1. "There is no claim to
Prophethood but to Muhaddathyat
[recipient of
Divine communication]
which has been made under the command of Allah. There is
no doubt in it that Muhaddathyat has a potential of
Nabuwwah [prophethood]
in it... if it be declared a metaphoric Nabuwwah, then
does it mean that there is a claim of 'Nabuwwah'?"
(Azala-e-Auham, pp. 421-422)

2. "They have fabricated a lie
against one who says that this fellow claims to be a
prophet." (Hamamat-al-Bushra, p. 8)

4. "Can such a wretched fabricator
who lays claim to Prophethood and Messengership have any
belief in the Holy Quran?

A person who believes in the Holy
Quran and considers the verse: "WA LAAKIN RASUL ALLAH-E
WA KHATAM AN-NABIYEEN" (but Messenger of Allah and the
Last of the Prophets) as words of Allah, can he say that
after the Holy Prophet Muhammad, peace be on him, he is a
messenger and a Prophet ... our Holy Prophet (Muhammad)
peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, is the Last of
the Prophets, and after him no Prophet will appear,
whether new or old ... but some time in the Ilhamat
[Revelation to
Saints] of Allah such
words are used about Auliya Allah as a matter of metaphor
or simile and these do not carry real meanings. The whole
dispute is this, that prejudice-ridden ignorant people
have dragged such words to different direction. The name
of the Promised Messiah that has been stated by the Holy
Prophet, peace be on him, as 'Nabi Allah' in Sahib
Muslim, that is in this metaphoric sense which is
established in the books of Auliya-e-Karam and is an
ordinary phraseology of Divine speech, otherwise how can
a prophet appear after the Last of the Prophets."
(Anjam-e-Atham [footnote on pp.
27-28])

What else can be said in
clarification; these words are used as metaphor and simile
and do not carry real meanings; ignorant, prejudiced people
are fabricating a false charge against him by putting real
meanings on these words. It is a matter for contemplation
for Qadiani Ulema as to who is playing the 'ignorant
prejudiced' person's role and whom the Founder is calling a
'wretched fabricator'; not one or two, but hundreds
of such quotations can be cited. They don't think this
much that these words have been written about those persons
who had attributed a claim to Prophethood to the Founder;
then the deception of the abrogation of writings previous to
1901 was invented. The Founder did not write so anywhere,
nor had any Ahmadi ever thought of it before 1914. When
Khalifa-e-Qadian invented this in his desire to declare
Muslims as Kafir[unbelievers],
that the writings of the Founder previous to 1901 have been
abrogated. If anyone had known it then, even now any Ahmadi
may step forward to state an oath that he had knowledge
before the writing of Khalifa-e-Qadian, that a change in the
claims of the Founder had occurred in 1901 and all his
previous writings in this behalf were abrogated. In reply to
this deception about change in claims of the Founder a
quotation of 1903 which is later than 1901 from the
Founder's book 'Mwahibur Rahman' should suffice. The Founder
writes at pages 66, 67 of this book under the title of "Some
words about my beliefs".

Can there be greater injustice than
this that in spite of such clear writings of the Founder, he
is being declared a real Prophet. There is no greater
misfortune for Ahmadiyya, that its own people are
accomplishing about which there was a complaint against
opponents.